Do You Know What’s In A Vaccine? Don’t You Think You Should?
Welcome to the AVN website and our leaflet page, where we discuss items in a leaflet of ours you may have received at an event, in your letter box or from elsewhere.
It is our hope you find these discussions helpful in your quest to keep yourself and your loved ones as healthy as possible.
To view the leaflet and print it yourself visit: Leaflet Downloads.
You research your baby’s car seat, cot and pram – what about their vaccines?
With any important decision these days we do our research. We usually think it is only sensible to look at independent information before purchasing something, rather than just look at the manufacturer’s or business owner’s information. Would we book a hotel in Spain based only on what the hotel says, and not read reviews from travellers? Do we buy anything important, in any area of life, based only on what the manufacturer says? Not really, for most people, most of the time.
Most people are very happy to trust their doctor on vaccines, and we are not suggesting people don’t do that. We do believe people will make the best decisions about vaccination if they understand their doctor mostly gets their information on vaccines directly or indirectly from the pharmaceutical companies who make the them, like they do for all the medicines they prescribe. This includes information on the effectiveness, safety and necessity of vaccines.
We would like to encourage you to think it is a valid and useful thing to do your own vaccine research, and encourage you to make your own decisions about what medical treatments you give your family.
Have you looked at the ingredients, side effects and contraindications listed on vaccine package inserts to consider if these shots are right for you and your family?
Package inserts are sheets of paper folded up inside a vaccine vial’s box. Vaccines should not be given without the recipient or their parent giving “informed consent”, which means they should have read the package insert and had any questions they may have answered to their satisfaction before agreeing to vaccination.
However, recipients are rarely if ever shown the package insert, and doctors and nurses are generally reluctant to produce them.
The package inserts and similar product information sheets are available online, and we have a page listing many of them here: Vaccine Product Information Sheets
Reported side effects listed in these sheets include Guillain-Barre syndrome, transverse myelitis, aseptic meningitis, multiple sclerosis and allergic reactions.
We also have a page on this website, Vaccine Ingredients, which has a very comprehensive listing and explanation of vaccine ingredients. These include human proteins, DNA and other cell debris from aborted foetuses, and cell debris including proteins and DNA from many animals including monkey, cattle, fowl and guinea pig. Many vaccines also contain non-soluble nano-particles of aluminium compound, put into the vaccine to stimulate a strong immune reaction.
Did you know that doctors who question vaccine safety, effectiveness or necessity can face disciplinary action?
Professor Peter Collignon is currently professor of microbiology at the Australian National University, Canberra, and also head of infectious diseases at Canberra Hospital.
Read about the criticism he received from health officials after commenting publicly about Australia’s flu vaccination program in the wake of the disastrous events of 2010, where CSL’s Fluvax caused severe reactions in many children, including brain damage and a child’s death. See this article in The Australian: Virus in the system
Professor Collignon says:
There’s been a lot of pressure on me. Like a lot of medical people, I believe vaccines are terrific – but it has come to the situation where it’s almost like motherhood, that you cannot question it, especially in the public arena, for fear you’ll undermine the vaccination program.
Also read this article with more from Professor Collignon: Vaccines may have increased swine flu risk
Professor Collignon has not faced disciplinary action, but we share this information to illustrate how doctors are discouraged from speaking against vaccines in any way.
Two Australian doctors have faced disciplinary action for questioning vaccines in recent years.
One is Dr John Piesse, a Victorian doctor who’s medical registration was suspended pending an investigation in late 2017. In July 2018 he retired from practise and withdrew his legal application to regain his registration. We have an article written by Dr Piesse on this website, read it here: VACCINES ARE UNAVOIDABLY UNSAFE – by Dr John Piesse
Another is Dr Kevin Coleman, a Central Coast (NSW) doctor also suspended in 2017 by health authorities for simply speaking at a rally organised to support Australians’ rights to make medical choices for their families. Hear from Dr Coleman in this video.
Did you know that the rich and well-educated have some of the lowest vaccination rates?
Surveys conducted in Melbourne by our health authorities have found interesting information about parents’ attitudes to vaccination.
9News ran a story about these survey results: “Immunisation rates in some of our wealthiest inner city suburbs are not improving. Dr Margie Danchin from Murdoch Children’s Research Institute is in the studio.”
Watch the segment on the 9News Facebook page.
Dr Danchin says the following, of some of Melbourne’s wealthier eastern suburbs:
We found that parents in these areas with higher levels of education actually have more concerns about the safety and necessity of vaccines than people with lower levels of education. So what we’re seeing I think is this cognitive dissonance between parents who are highly educated, and many of whom actually have a background in science, who are questioning the safety of vaccines. … Many of these families are, as I said, highly educated, very well read, and they have genuine questions about the safety of vaccines in particular, and they are really seeking answers to those questions.
To summarise, this research has shown parents with higher education, often with a background in science, have more concerns about vaccines than other parents.
Did you know that babies are given the Hepatitis B shot on day of birth, when there is negligible risk for this sexually transmitted disease?
Hepatitis B is generally caught by having either unprotected sexual contact or contact with infected blood, for example by sharing needles with drug addicts. It is not caught through casual contact nor have there been any reported instances of transmission via saliva, sharing of toothbrushes or other similar contact. Hepatitis B positive children attend normal schools, as do HIV positive children.
The hepatitis B vaccine was first given to newborns to protect them from catching hepatitis B from infected mothers during birth. Hepatitis B positive mothers were detected through a screening program and offered the vaccine.
Then after some time, vaccination on day of birth was extended to all newborns in Australia, whether or not their mother was hepatitis B positive, despite all pregnant women continuing to be screened. As far as we know only Australia and the US give this vaccine to newborns.
It is apparent that the vast majority of infants born in Australia today would have absolutely no risky behaviours which would leave them susceptible to hepatitis B infections. So we question why a newborn needs this vaccine, particularly when the hepatitis B vaccine is included in the vaccines given at 2, 4 and 6 months of age, as part of the Infanrix hexa injection.
Read more about the hepatitis B vaccine on our page: Hepatitis B
Did you know that vaccines may be contaminated with a large number of animal viruses and bacteria, some of which have been linked with cancer and other chronic diseases?
Disease viruses used in vaccine manufacture are grown in living cells, because viruses can only multiply inside living cells. For example, measles, mumps and flu viruses are grown in chicken egg cells, rubella and chicken pox viruses are grown in aborted human foetal cells and poliovirus is grown in monkey kidney cells.
The cells vaccine viruses are grown in need to be kept alive, so they are bathed in commercial nutrient media, for example Stainer-Scholte medium and Mueller’s growth medium. Contaminant animal viruses and bacteria are present in both the cells viruses are grown in and in growth media like these.
When the disease viruses are collected to be put into vaccines, it is impossible to clean them completely. The US government’s disease authority the CDC publishes a Vaccine Excipient & Media Summary which lists contaminants found in vaccines from the production process.
Bovine calf serum in nutrient media is particularly known to contain animal viruses and very small types of bacteria known as mycoplasma and nanobacteria. Read about calf blood in vaccines and other products here: Pregnant cows ‘suffering’ for calf blood industry – insider
Read about contaminant bacteria and animal viruses (viruses that infect animals) found in vaccines and about them causing cancer and other disorders in the following articles:
Also see our Vaccine Ingredients page.
Did you know that the media considers it to be ‘false balance’ to report anything about vaccination that is not completely positive?
There are not many negative stories about vaccines in the media. Occasionally there will be a story about someone injured by a vaccine, for example, this woman in Melbourne who has become paralysed by the flu shot, this father from Kalgoorlie whose health is ruined after the whooping cough booster, and this Perth baby who has brain damage, also from the flu shot.
However if there are events that cast any sort of damning light on vaccines in general and their promoters, the media is silent. In fact it has become taboo in the media to mention any problems at all with vaccines, apart from a very occasional vaccine injury story.
There are various reasons for this. One is that in the US drugs are advertised in the media, including television, and now revenue from this has become the main source of income for media organisations, so stories negative about vaccines are not allowed. The US is a big source of our information on vaccines.
Another is we believe Australian media organisations are directed to not portray vaccines in a negative light because of a belief people could lose trust in vaccines, stop vaccinating their children and dangerous diseases could sweep the nation – a notion that has no validity, because death rates from infectious diseases declined dramatically in first-world nations before mass vaccination began in the 1950s.
A third is that journalists have been taught that showing “both sides” of the vaccine issue is not a true balance but is instead “false balance”, because supposedly science has settled the questions of vaccine safety, necessity and effectiveness, and it is risky to air any other view. Of course we know science is never settled, and there are many very solid science studies that cast doubt on the vaccine narrative touted by authorities.
Read more about perceived “false balance” in reporting on vaccines here:
Impartial journalism is laudable. But false balance is dangerous
Did you know that vaccine companies have paid billions of dollars in fines in recent years due to fraudulent business practices, bribery and deceptive marketing?
We’ll start with a quote from Robert F Kennedy Jr, acclaimed environmental lawyer and nephew of JFK:
Every year, we see million, or even billion-dollar litigation settlements against Merck, Pfizer, Novartis, Glaxo, Abbott, and Lilly for false marketing, off label uses, adulterated products, falsifying science, kickbacks and fraudulent safety data in their pharmaceutical products…We see shenanigans like that all the time in the United States and there’s this whole industry of trial lawyers making very good livelihoods telling those stories to juries.
All of our vaccines in Australia are made overseas, except for Fluvax vaccine, which is made by the now-privatised CSL.
Below are some instances of misbehaviour by drug companies – the question is, can we trust these companies to be telling doctors, health authorities, politicians, the press and the public the truth about their vaccines?
Did you know that vaccines do not undergo the same rigorous scientific testing for safety or effectiveness which other drugs must go through?
For clinical trials of new drugs in general, a double-blind, randomised control trial (RCT) is considered the “gold standard”, or best, way of testing them.
This means the trial participants are randomly divided into two groups, one is given the drug and the other another substance for comparison, or as a “control”, and both doctors and subjects don’t know who got which. Researchers then compare drug effectiveness and safety in the test group with that found in the control group.
Drugs are usually compared to a control that is an inactive substance, as this is the most effective way to test them.
Vaccine safety testing is usually done in randomised control trials, but the control substance is rarely something inactive, such as saline. Instead, vaccines are most often tested against a similar vaccine already in use. This is because authorities say it would be unethical to deny someone the protective benefit of a vaccine.
Vaccine safety is assessed by comparing the rate of adverse reactions in the test group to that of the control group; if the rate in the test group is not more than in the control group, the vaccine is considered safe. However if the control itself causes adverse events, the trial is not a true test of the vaccine’s safety. As there are many reports of damage by the vaccines used as controls, the test vaccine appears safe when it is not.
In some cases the vaccine is tested against one or more of its ingredients. For example, the first version of the HPV vaccine Gardasil was tested against the aluminium compounds used in it, even though aluminium is known to be very immunogenic.
Another type of clinical trial follows thousands of subjects and records adverse events. A problem with this type of safety testing is that the adverse events are reported by doctors, who often have a belief vaccines are harmless, so they do not report reactions such as neurological disorders, demyelination conditions, encephalitis and death.
Please be aware that pre-licensing clinical trials are conducted by the manufacturers, and there is no oversight. In July 2018 the US government’s HHS was found guilty of not doing vaccine safety testing required of them by law, see down the page here: National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
In Australia the TGA licenses vaccines for use here – we should note that the TGA is 100% industry funded. See Dr Judy Wilyman’s PhD thesis: 6.6 Conflicts of Interest in the Regulation of Vaccines in Australia
Effectiveness of vaccines, that is, whether they work to stop the disease in question, is done by measuring titres of antibodies to the disease material in the vaccine. However for some vaccines, we believe the disease germs in the vaccine are not the cause of the disease in the community. This applies particularly to the Human Papillomavirus (HPV), vaccine and the Pertussis (Whooping Cough) vaccine. Also, this type of testing gives no indication of how long immunity will last – in reality vaccine-derived immunity often lasts only a few years.
Did you know that there have been no large studies done that compare all health outcomes in fully-vaccinated vs fully-unvaccinated children?
We are told over and over by health authorities, politicians, and the press that science has proven many times vaccines could not be causing autism and other neurological disorders.
A study that is often quoted by our government, and by other governments around the world, is this paper from Sydney University:
Vaccines are not associated with autism: An evidence-based meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies
It is a meta-analysis of 10 studies, and exploring the paper will show you that of the 10 studies, 6 looked at the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine and 4 looked at mercury in vaccines, to see if they caused autism. None of the 10 studies include an unvaccinated group, in the sense of having had no vaccines, and the authors claim their analysis suggests “vaccinations are not associated with the development of autism or autism spectrum disorder”. Read more about this study here: Meta-Analysis madness in vaccine-autism science
One paper in the meta-analysis study, about the MMR vaccine, uses the word “unvaccinated” to mean children who have not had the MMR – but these children are otherwise vaccinated.
It happens the major studies claimed by health authorities world-wide to show vaccines do not cause autism have almost exclusively looked at only the MMR or mercury. One vaccine, one ingredient. What about all the other vaccines? What about the combination of vaccines? What about all the other ingredients?
The only way to show whether vaccines are safe is to look at large numbers of subjects and compare all health outcomes of those who have had no vaccines with that of those who have had all or most of their vaccines.
In the US four bills have been put before Congress over the years asking their health authorities to do a vaccinated vs unvaccinated study. None have passed. Find them here:
Did you know that on average there are over 3,000 side effects including 4.3 deaths reported every year in Australia following vaccination?
To see these figures:
- Visit the TGA’s page Database of Adverse Event Notifications (DAEN)
- Click on Search DAEN – medicines
- Click the “I have read and understand this above” button.
- Write the word ‘vaccine’ into the vaccine field, tick the box in the header so all vaccines are ticked.
- Select a date range and click Search.
We did a search for the past 10 years to obtain an average over that period.
For a date range of January 1 2008 to December 31 2017 (10 years), we found there were 178 different vaccines reported (this includes non-specified vaccines) and 32,148 adverse events reported including 43 deaths.
This gives an average of 3,215 adverse events reported and 4.3 deaths per year over those 10 years.
An important point is that serious vaccine reactions and even deaths are often not reported to authorities. The percentage of events reported is believed by many people to be as low as 1%.
This occurs because victims and their families don’t realise they can report reactions, doctors often don’t report reactions because they don’t want to be targeted as being against vaccination, and often doctors have such a strong belief that vaccines are benign they don’t believe a vaccine could have caused serious injury and death, and they say an adverse event happening after vaccination is a coincidence.
For an example of this, please watch this video of a mother speaking of how her child died the night after vaccination, and the death was attributed to SIDS. This was recorded in the US, but it also happens in Australia.
“Infectious deaths fell before widespread vaccination was implemented”
– Professor Fiona Stanley, Australian of the Year (2003), Child Health Since Federation, 2001
Professor Fiona Stanley is a medical researcher based at the University of Western Australia in Perth. She specialises in statistical analysis of child health, and in 2001 she published a document entitled: CHILD HEALTH SINCE FEDERATION, which reports on the health of Australian children over the century 1901 to 2001.
In the report she says “Infectious deaths fell before widespread vaccination was implemented.” This is correct; data shows death rates from infectious diseases declined by a huge percentage before mass vaccination began in the 1950s. See this graph of measles deaths in Australia, for example:
Graph from Fooling Ourselves on the fundamental value of vaccines by Greg Beattie
Stanley goes on to say: “However, since the 1950s, mass vaccination has been the single most effective public health measure to reduce the occurrence of infections, to reduce child deaths and to improve child health (Ada and Isaacs 2000).”
Claims such as this are ignoring some facts. One is that death rates from infectious diseases were in steep decline at the time vaccines were introduced, so it’s likely they would have continued to decline without vaccines – how much, we’ll never know. Another is that the meningitis vaccine she talks about to illustrate her point has not actually changed the rate of meningitis deaths in Australia.
She discusses the meningitis vaccine Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib), introduced here in 1993. At the time the Hib bacterium was the predominant cause of meningitis, so vaccine developers produced a vaccine to combat it, expecting this would reduce meningitis deaths.
The vaccine did reduce Hib infections significantly, in just 2 years, and Stanley shows us a graph demonstrating this. However the rate of meningitis deaths in Australia was unchanged by the Hib vaccine, because it’s the nature of bacterial infections that if you remove one species or strain of bacteria from circulation another will take its place. See this graph of meningitis deaths in Australia:
Find more meningitis graphs in Fooling Ourselves on the fundamental value of vaccines by Greg Beattie
Australia has now had a few different vaccines for meningitis, with no evidence easily available to this point that they reduce the meningitis death rate. Find our pages on meningitis vaccines here: Vaccines and Diseases.
Children’s Immunisation Schedules Australia
We see from the schedules on the back of the leaflet there has been a huge increase in both the number of diseases targeted by vaccines and of repeated doses given since today’s grandparents were young.
Most people who don’t have young children have no idea children are given so many doses. Even parents of young vaccinated children often don’t realise how many vaccines their children are getting because in many cases there are multiple vaccines in one shot. For example, at a doctor’s visit at 2 months of age, a baby will get 2 injections and an oral vaccine, and parents perhaps don’t realise that one of those shots contains 6 vaccines.
Some may think the growth in the schedule is a good thing – today’s medical technology is giving us the best protection possible from infectious diseases.
We would like to point out however that all vaccination carries inherent risks, and for many families the risk from a vaccine may be greater than from the disease.
You may like to visit our Vaccination Schedules in Australia page for more information about the schedules.
“I’m fully vaccinated and I’m fine”
~ But with higher rates of cancer, developmental disorders, asthma, allergies and autoimmune diseases than ever before, what’s in store for our youngest generation?”
The conditions listed above are much more common than they were in the 1980s and earlier. Asthma, cancer and neuro-developmental disorders were known, but did not affect so many children as they do now. Allergies to common foods were very unusual, and virtually no-one had allergy to peanuts and tree nuts. Sales of Epipens started in the late 1980s, and they are routinely carried by many children today.
The increase in these conditions began in children born around 1990 in several first-world countries. This coincided with a sudden increase in the number and doses of vaccines on the schedules in those countries.
For more about this please see the following book: The Peanut Allergy Epidemic, Third Edition: What’s Causing It and How to Stop It by Heather Fraser
The USA’s National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has paid out $3.6 billion to vaccine-injured individuals since 1989.
In 1986 the Reagan government in the US passed a law that stopped most US citizens from suing vaccine makers for damage caused by vaccines. They did this because so many people were suing drug companies for vaccine damage that many companies couldn’t afford to stay in the vaccine market, so were pulling out, and the supply of vaccines was threatened.
In recognition of the fact that some people are damaged by vaccines, the government included a program in the law for paying victims compensation, known as the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), and payouts began in 1989.
The NVICP has now paid $3.6 billion to victims or their families since 1989.
To see the total amount paid for yourself, visit Meetings, then go to the most recent Meeting Book and search for the total amount. You will also be able to look at Adjudicated Settlements in the Meeting Book, where the claims and injuries are listed.
The amounts victims receive from the NVICP is much less than people got from suing drug companies directly. For cases of severe injury where victims need constant high-level care this is both unjust and heart-breaking.
It is believed only a small percentage of cases of vaccine injury reach this program, known informally as “Vaccine Court”. This is because most people living in the US don’t know the program exists, there is a time limit of 3 years on making a claim, most people are in disarray after experiencing vaccine injury themselves or in their family, medical doctors are generally unhelpful because they believe vaccines could not be causing the damage, and claimants have to get a lawyer.
Nineteen countries have a program of some description for compensating vaccine victims. Australia does not. See: No-fault compensation following adverse events attributed to vaccination: a review of international programs
Improved nutrition, sanitation and hygiene are understood to be the major factors that resulted in the greatly reduced mortality from infectious diseases observed before mass vaccination was introduced.
Any student of history knows about living and working conditions in the 19th century in countries like Australia, for the majority of people.
Melbourne in the 1880s was known as “Marvellous Melbourne” for its grand buildings and wealth from firstly gold then later from the property boom. However Melbourne was also dubbed “Marvellous Smellbourne” in that period by a visiting journalist, due to the smell of the refuse in the streets that led to householders keeping their windows closed. Night men who were meant to take human waste to dumping areas outside the city would instead dump it in town because it was easier.
Today it would seem obvious there was a reason why infectious disease caused so many deaths in that era. But strangely, many people seem to think vaccines made the diseases stop killing people, even though widespread vaccination only began in the 1950s, 60 years after cities around the world began to clean up and bring better food and water to their populations.
For a very interesting read about the history of diseases and vaccines, we suggest you read the following book: Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History by Suzanne Humphries MD and Roman Bystrianyk. This book will certainly answer questions you may have about smallpox and polio.
Also see below how death rates from infectious diseases have declined in England since the middle of the 19th century (there was no vaccine for scarlet fever, but the death rate declined anyway).
We have a downloads page for the leaflet, for those of you who would like to print the leaflet at home or get it commercially printed. Visit Leaflet Downloads.